Britain unveiled plans on Tuesday to allow judges to sit without a jury in serious and complex fraud cases, prompting civil rights groups to say the move was the beginning of the end for fair trials.
Attorney General Lord Goldsmith said a change in the law was needed to reduce the risk of expensive and long fraud trials collapsing because they were too complicated.
“It is vital that the criminal justice system should be capable of dealing with all of those who are accused of serious wrongdoing,” Goldsmith said in a statement.
“This has not always been the case in the most serious and complicated fraud cases.
“In spite of efforts to keep complex trials within reasonable bounds, some drag on for months, which poses and intolerable burden on jurors.”
A fraud case which cost some $110 million and lasted 21 months collapsed at London’s Old Bailey in March after jurors and members of the defense repeatedly needed time off.
Under the new legislation, the trial judge and the Lord Chief Justice would need to agree to any prosecution request to have a trial without jury.
Shami Chakrabarti, director of civil rights group Liberty, described the move as patronizing and said it reflected the government’s lack of enthusiasm for jury trial.
“No one should be under any illusion that this policy will stay restricted to serious fraud cases,” she said. “Evidential complexity is an excuse that may be used in a whole host of trials.”
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesman Mark Oaten said they were disturbed by the proposal.
“Yet again Labour seem prepared to abandon the principle of fair trials and justice that have served this country well for decades,” he said.
The proposal will be debated in parliament later this year.
